| Forum Index > Closed |
Please keep the QQ to a minimum if you do not like this update. We are happy to hear your reasoning for not liking a ranked system, but no "OMG VOLVO WHY" posts. | ||
|
Erasme
Bahamas15899 Posts
On December 23 2013 22:48 ReignSupreme. wrote: Has anyone had an overly large increase in points (compared to the average of 25~) after winning a match? No. Not even when i beat empire stack #brag | ||
|
Andre
Slovenia3523 Posts
On December 23 2013 22:48 ReignSupreme. wrote: Has anyone had an overly large increase in points (compared to the average of 25~) after winning a match? Highest I've gotten was 43. Lowest was 19 iirc. | ||
|
Gheizen64
Italy2077 Posts
| ||
|
SkelA
Macedonia13069 Posts
Have gotten terrible players as allies on the level of when i started playing dota , whenever i run into a stack party i mostly win and lose when im solo vs stacks. No idea why did they remove the solo queue, its been really terrible experience so far  | ||
|
TRAP[yoo]
Hungary6026 Posts
edit: is there any reason why iam always the guy with the highest rank in my team? | ||
|
Penecks
United States600 Posts
| ||
|
phantomlancer23
733 Posts
My teammate is clearly worst than me and the other players i faced in calibration games was an antimage with vanguard(3000 points) a gyro with lothar (3000 points) people who flamed me because i didnt pick the great riki my draft won all the games some times by itself.I m stuck now in this shitty rating as predicted, playing with people that clearly are not in my level,valve didnt give me even a chance for proper rating. I probably got the -300 from my mate because this system counts the before calibration rigged games also it punishes support play it sucks its broken and rigged. These idiots in valve who created it must be fired and also Gabe Newell is the biggest carnival ever. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Ayaz2810
United States2763 Posts
On December 24 2013 00:46 TRAP[yoo] wrote: why would you choose to play ranked if you just dick around and ruin the game for everybody? edit: is there any reason why iam always the guy with the highest rank in my team? I had a guy in ranked MM go 0-9 on Ursa and say "it's just a game. Who cares if we win?". Why the fuck would you even play a game if you're not going to attempt to win it? How does that make any sense at all? | ||
|
crms
United States11933 Posts
MMR experts please explain this: We're in a group, ratings are: 4900 4500 4450 4150 3800 Every game we lose and win the same amount of points. How is that possible? Shouldn't the lower people earn more, higher people earn less (more or less) but everyone getting +17 or +20 or -17 seems incredibly broken and not working as intended. | ||
|
Penecks
United States600 Posts
On December 24 2013 04:07 crms wrote: Every game we lose and win the same amount of points. How is that possible? Shouldn't the lower people earn more, higher people earn less (more or less) but everyone getting +17 or +20 or -17 seems incredibly broken and not working as intended. I'm pretty sure they have to treat parties as "entire units" since they use some algorithm or something to account for the fact that you are a stack, etc. Also it would really deter people from playing ranked games with those lower than themselves, for example if I'm 4k why would I ever play with a 3.5k friend if I'm going to lose a lot more than I win in the long run, even if we go positive. | ||
|
Jinxed
United States6450 Posts
| ||
|
Laurens
Belgium4553 Posts
A win is +x, loss is -x. Performance or rating relative to other party members doesn't change that, it only seems to consider your team's MMR in relation to the other team's MMR and the outcome of the game. Not perfect by a long shot, but it's something. It's a bit baffling though. There was clearly some sort of smurf detection in unranked that moved a new account up to high/vhigh quickly after some stomps with massive KDAs, yet for ranked this doesn't seem to apply. | ||
|
DrPandaPhD
5188 Posts
On December 24 2013 04:26 Laurens wrote: I think it's just not a very complicated algorithm. A win is +x, loss is -x. Performance or rating relative to other party members doesn't change that, it only seems to consider your team's MMR in relation to the other team's MMR and the outcome of the game. Not perfect by a long shot, but it's something. It's a bit baffling though. There was clearly some sort of smurf detection in unranked that moved a new account up to high/vhigh quickly after some stomps with massive KDAs, yet for ranked this doesn't seem to apply. I think it's because you need to have played ~150 games of unranked before you can even queue to ranked. Probably to prevent people making new accounts, hoping for 10 calibration wins and ending up in way higher rating than they should be. | ||
|
TRAP[yoo]
Hungary6026 Posts
| ||
|
Laurens
Belgium4553 Posts
In their post they stated: "Win/loss is the primary criteria used to update MMR, but individual performance also plays a role, especially when our uncertainty about your MMR is high. It is possible for an individual MMR to increase after a loss or decrease after a win" The bolded part just seems like a complete lie xD | ||
|
crms
United States11933 Posts
On December 24 2013 04:24 LeLoup wrote: Why would you gain more just because you have less points? If anything it makes perfect sense that you'd all remain constant since it is rating you guys together as a stack. As long as nobody performs way over or under expectations you should all get about the same. After all it isn't like the lower players are closing the skill gap in any statistical way while you're playing together. It doesn't make perfect sense and it would be unique to valve's system. HoN and well, any other mmr system wins/loses points relative to your mmr and your opponents mmr. If valve is indeed grouping you together and saying everyone is X mmr for this game, it's not accurately assessing mmr gains (or losses) for anyone except maybe the mid ranked player. Valve using this method would make it take an extraordinarily long time to dig yourself out of hole out when compared traditional mmr systems. I'm not super eloquent at speaking about mmr systems but I know having everyone gain/lose the same is incredibly broken compared to traditional systems. I look forward to hear from a more seasoned expert like Excalibur. | ||
|
Darkren
Canada1841 Posts
On December 24 2013 03:59 Ayaz2810 wrote: I had a guy in ranked MM go 0-9 on Ursa and say "it's just a game. Who cares if we win?". Why the fuck would you even play a game if you're not going to attempt to win it? How does that make any sense at all? You play it to have fun whether to win or loose That makes a lot of sense to me | ||
|
TRAP[yoo]
Hungary6026 Posts
On December 24 2013 05:17 Darkren wrote: You play it to have fun whether to win or loose That makes a lot of sense to me why would you need to play ranked to have fun? thats what i dont get. edit: i was hoping that it would be a lil bit more competetive now but i dont get that vibe at all. it feels like everybody is playing it and people just do the stuff they would normally do. | ||
|
Darkren
Canada1841 Posts
On December 24 2013 05:28 TRAP[yoo] wrote: why would you need to play ranked to have fun? thats what i dont get. edit: i was hoping that it would be a lil bit more competetive now but i dont get that vibe at all. it feels like everybody is playing it and people just do the stuff they would normally do. Your turning the question around, Hes playing ranked but wants to still have fun even if he looses or wins | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Other Games |
|
Replay Cast
Wardi Open
WardiTV Invitational
Replay Cast
The PondCast
WardiTV Invitational
Replay Cast
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
|
|
|
EPT
